5 ms·

> So a few hundred feed, costing millions? Nonsense. 1. Your parent actually actively maintains a private road, and has probably done their research... 2. It

by nmrm2 11y ago

> So a few hundred feed, costing millions? Nonsense. 1. Your parent actually actively maintains a private road, and has probably done their research... 2. It costs them so much because they just have a single road, so they can't amortize the cost over an entire city or country of roadway. Public utilities tend toward monopoly for exactly this reason -- providing the utility to any small fraction of society is enormously expensive. Make no mistake, natural monopoly is what happens when you privatize utilities. Ever met a Comcast customer who feels anything short of contempt toward Comcast? Now imagine dealing with Comcast any time you need to drive to the grocery store. Or even leave your house. 3. Parent's numbers actually make sense when compared to Florida's, once you realize Florida has an entire state over which it can amortize costs.

JoeAltmaier 11y ago
The Govt doesn't actually pave anything. Roads are a commodity. There are a half-dozen pavers in my small community of 50,000. If the costs are in the $100K per thousand feet, they are that for everybody. Again, $M for a few hundred feet is nonsense.
- nmrm2 11y ago
  Parent said METERS, not feet. So parent is saying maybe 8mil for a mile. Not insane to assume low volume work in a presumably remote area will be double or triple the price that the entire state of Florida can get. Especially for a previously unpaved roadway with bridges that probably also needs widening, leveling, etc. That isn't patch work cleaning up existing paved road... The number is high but not unfathomably so... Anyways, either parent is telling the truth or not. But I find it hard to believe parent helps maintain a 2 mile private road and also you know better than him the cost of paving that particular road.
  - xixi77 11y ago
    As has been said, road paving is a commodity business, so the reason why this particular road might be that expensive is probably that it's a remote road on difficult terrain. Which raises the question: should this very expensive road, which is primarily used by members of this specific and admittedly wealthy community, be subsidized by the rest of (relatively) poor taxpayers of that state?
    - JoeAltmaier 11y ago
      Yes. That's called infrastructure. Whenever America has 'subsidized' infrastructure, the nation has seen many fold return. Whether it was rural electrification, or secondary roads, or rural mail delivery, having it a given for everybody means anybody can assume a certain level of service. Commerce thrives on that.
      - xixi77 11y ago
        I see the level of service argument. But, if an argument applies to roads or mail delivery, or landline phones, why does it not apply to fast internet service or cellular coverage or many other things, which have been doing just fine without centrally funded infrastructure? Also, shifting the cost of such roads to everyone encourages even more construction in remote areas, which doesn't seem like a good thing to promote...
        JoeAltmaier 10y ago
        Ah, cell towers seem to benefit from some govt protection. We live in the country. The cell companies have to find land to place their towers on. They make an argument that, for emergency services, they're required to build the towers. So its inevitable, and we've just got to decide where they go up. Not whether they go up. And actually, here in the country, there are many cell networks that do very poorly. Houses still have land lines mostly because connectivity can be very spotty. A govt-mandated tower utility would help that. Lastly, its not about subsidizing. E.g. REC was not subsidized, just a protected class of business that was mandated to provide service to everyone in their area. Subscribers pay the whole freight. Its like insurance; those near the generation plant are kind of subsidizing those far away, but everybody gets service.
true_religion 11y ago
Warm mixed asphalt roads should cost about $1M per mile. It's expensive, but it's not ludicrously expensive. If well done, in a warm environment, of low traffic, no truck levels, then you won't have to repave for upwards of a decade. Source: Maintenance a private road outside the USA. Labour is cheaper, however, everything else is more expensive so it balances out vs US numbers last time I checked.
- rsync 11y ago
  (parent here) Again, I was giving my own anecdotes about my own road, but then mid-comment switched to a hypothetical "stretch of road" that someone might drive by, being maintained, and in my mind I was thinking of a four-lane highway. It was unclear. I will say, however, that with all due respect - things are more expensive here in California than they are in FL, so while 400 meters of four-lane @ the Florida rate posted above comes out to ~1.2 Million, it's probably a fair amount more in California. It's expensive.

by nmrm2 11y ago

JoeAltmaier 11y ago

The Govt doesn't actually pave anything. Roads are a commodity. There are a half-dozen pavers in my small community of 50,000. If the costs are in the $100K per thousand feet, they are that for everybody. Again, $M for a few hundred feet is nonsense.

nmrm2 11y ago
Parent said METERS, not feet. So parent is saying maybe 8mil for a mile. Not insane to assume low volume work in a presumably remote area will be double or triple the price that the entire state of Florida can get. Especially for a previously unpaved roadway with bridges that probably also needs widening, leveling, etc. That isn't patch work cleaning up existing paved road... The number is high but not unfathomably so... Anyways, either parent is telling the truth or not. But I find it hard to believe parent helps maintain a 2 mile private road and also you know better than him the cost of paving that particular road.
- xixi77 11y ago
  As has been said, road paving is a commodity business, so the reason why this particular road might be that expensive is probably that it's a remote road on difficult terrain. Which raises the question: should this very expensive road, which is primarily used by members of this specific and admittedly wealthy community, be subsidized by the rest of (relatively) poor taxpayers of that state?
  - JoeAltmaier 11y ago
    Yes. That's called infrastructure. Whenever America has 'subsidized' infrastructure, the nation has seen many fold return. Whether it was rural electrification, or secondary roads, or rural mail delivery, having it a given for everybody means anybody can assume a certain level of service. Commerce thrives on that.
    - xixi77 11y ago
      I see the level of service argument. But, if an argument applies to roads or mail delivery, or landline phones, why does it not apply to fast internet service or cellular coverage or many other things, which have been doing just fine without centrally funded infrastructure? Also, shifting the cost of such roads to everyone encourages even more construction in remote areas, which doesn't seem like a good thing to promote...
      - JoeAltmaier 10y ago
        Ah, cell towers seem to benefit from some govt protection. We live in the country. The cell companies have to find land to place their towers on. They make an argument that, for emergency services, they're required to build the towers. So its inevitable, and we've just got to decide where they go up. Not whether they go up. And actually, here in the country, there are many cell networks that do very poorly. Houses still have land lines mostly because connectivity can be very spotty. A govt-mandated tower utility would help that. Lastly, its not about subsidizing. E.g. REC was not subsidized, just a protected class of business that was mandated to provide service to everyone in their area. Subscribers pay the whole freight. Its like insurance; those near the generation plant are kind of subsidizing those far away, but everybody gets service.

true_religion 11y ago

Warm mixed asphalt roads should cost about $1M per mile. It's expensive, but it's not ludicrously expensive. If well done, in a warm environment, of low traffic, no truck levels, then you won't have to repave for upwards of a decade. Source: Maintenance a private road outside the USA. Labour is cheaper, however, everything else is more expensive so it balances out vs US numbers last time I checked.

rsync 11y ago
(parent here) Again, I was giving my own anecdotes about my own road, but then mid-comment switched to a hypothetical "stretch of road" that someone might drive by, being maintained, and in my mind I was thinking of a four-lane highway. It was unclear. I will say, however, that with all due respect - things are more expensive here in California than they are in FL, so while 400 meters of four-lane @ the Florida rate posted above comes out to ~1.2 Million, it's probably a fair amount more in California. It's expensive.